The Scottish Naturalist. 



301 



has been going by this name among British Mycologists, I have 

 never been able to satisfy myself as to its identity with Fries' 

 species. Ag. storea is recorded and described in three of Fries' 

 works, his Epicrisis (1836-38), his Monographia (1857,) and his 

 Hyphomycetes Europcei (1874). In each of these it is expressly 

 mentioned that he had found it only twice, in 1815 and in 1833, 

 and on both occasions on the same trunk. As regards his 

 acquaintance with the species, therefore, all the three works are of 

 equal value, for he had never met with it after describing it in the 

 Epicrisis. Indeed the description in the Hyphomycetes is a 

 verbatim transcript of that in the Epicrisis, so that I am inclined 

 to regard the description in the Monographia as his latest inde- 

 pendent account of the species. Now in that description it is 

 expressly declared to be a solitary-growing species, a. feature 

 which is emphasised by being printed in italics, and which is said 

 to remove it far from other species otherwise approaching it 

 closely. On the other hand the fungus which has been passing 

 among us as Ag. storea Fr., is a remarkably crespitose one, 

 diverging in this respect very strikingly from the habit of the true 

 plant. Stevenson in his British Fungi gives Fries' description of 

 the species with his usual accuracy, and mentions two habitats, 

 Ascot and Perth Fungus Show. I know nothing of the Ascot 

 specimens ; but those which occurred at Perth were growing in 

 large clusters, and it was there I got, from a distinguished English 

 Mycologist, the name of Ag. storea Fr. for a fungus which I had 

 previously taken for Ag. lachrymabundus Fr. Cooke cuts the 

 knot of the difficulty arising from the csespitose habit of the 

 British plant by calling it Ag. storea Fr. var., ca3spitosus C. But 

 let any one compare the figure which he so designates with that 

 which he gives of Ag. lachrymabundus Fr., and, excepting the 

 slight difference of colour, he will find little to distinguish them. 

 The conclusion I am inclined to come to is that my original idea 

 was correct, and that the fungus which has been taken for Ag. 

 storea Fr., is only a form, and scarcely entitled to be called a 

 variety of Ag. lachrymabundus Fr. 



